About your Search

20130318
20130326
STATION
CSPAN 11
CSPAN2 5
FBC 3
KCSM (PBS) 1
KRCB (PBS) 1
LANGUAGE
English 32
Search Results 0 to 31 of about 32 (some duplicates have been removed)
for two minutes. ms. castor: democrats and republicans agree that deficit reduction is important. in fact, over the past year and a half we have achieved over $2.7 trillion in debt reduction. now the republicans want to take us through a charade with this tea party budget. if enacted, the republican budget would weaken america's recovery. it would undermine what makes america great and what makes america strong. like education, the ability of students to attend college, medical research and inthe noah vation, the about of -- ability of our older neighbors to live their lives in dignity in their retirement years through medicare and long-term care. now we get a lot of advice and economists across the board, in fact, our own congressional budget office, advise that the best and fastest way to reduce the deficit to is to make sure people across america have jobs and are working. it is inexplicable that the republican budget proposes to eliminate jobs in construction, in education, scientific research, and instead heaps the burden on middle class families. experts predict the republican budge
. this is something that every family in america is asking us to focus on. number two, we need to tackle our deficit and debt fairly and responsibly. as democrats, we understand that is a responsibility that we bear today and we do it in this budget. and number three, we need to keep the promises we made as a nation to our seniors and our families and our communities. many who have struggled so much over the last few years and are counting on us to be there for them again now. mr. president, we'll be hearing a lot more about all these principles today and we're going to discuss the stark contrast between the budget that is expected to move in the house of representatives today and the plan and path forward that we have put forward here in the senate as democrats. mr. president, i will yield to senator sessions for his opening remarks, and we will continue this debate throughout the day. mr. sessions: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from alabama. mr. sessions: i thank the chair and would express my appreciation to senator murray for her leadership and who are courtesy and her skill
and leave a nearly $6 trillion hole in the deficit that would lead to tax increases for middle-income families. that isn't balance. that is total imbalance. at the same time, republicans propose cutting $3.3 trillion from programs for people with low and moderate incomes, including hundreds of billions of dollars for food nutrition and medicaid programs. so i want to end by asking the republicans when they come and talk about their tax proposals to name a specific that they would address. it's not in the republican budget. name one, name two, name three. otherwise, it's worse than empty. the chair: the time of the gentleman has expired. the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. ryan: with that, mr. chairman, i yield three members to the gentleman from indiana, r. rokita. mr. rokita: i thank chairman ryan in bringing this budget to the floor. i rise in high support of it. i also am very proud, one of the highest honors i have had in my short time here to serve on this committee. not because of chairman ryan only, but because of the members. by members, i mean republican and democrat mem
to work, taking a shared responsibility approach to our long-term deficits so we bring them down in a balanced smart way and they rejected the idea that we're going to move the economy forward by giving windfall tax cuts to the very wealthiest in the country and the benefits of that would trickle down and lift everybody up. they rejected that lopsided approach that balance the budgets on the backs of everybody but the folks at the very top. balance the budget on the backs of our kids' education by slashing important investments. in that category of spending we make these important investments for our country and our future, they double the cut from the sequester. so those are our investments in our kids' education. those are our investments in science and research to help power our economy. those are our investments to help modernize our infrastructure. they cut transportation by 15% when we have 15% unemployment in the construction industry. so mr. chairman, the american people rejected the kind of uncompromising lopsided approach that we see once again presented here in the hou
nation that does not -- is not riddled with debt and deficit, but also a nation that continues to be the economic leader in the world. and i believe our plan makes -- protects those investments in those key components of growth. and i hope over the coming hours that we will go through this debate and -- and i know we'll have a spirited period of a lot of amendments. this -- this budget i believe will pass and it will have to then find agreement with our colleagues in the house. and i just want to again commend both the chair and, for that matter, the ranking member. at the end of the day, we have to find common agreement to get this done. this issue that hovers all over of our other debates has become a metaphor as to whether our institutions can if you please in the 2 1*9 century. so just as the chair and rank member found agreement through a markup process where both sides were heard and amendments were offered and debated in a fair and open process, i want to both thank the chair and rank member for their commitment. they have different idead about how we get there, but at t
and better jobs for the american people. after all the budgets that never balance and record deficits, job creation, we would be coming off the four best years in modmodern american history, because we had four $1 trillion deficits in a row. another that will, quote, only be $850 billion this year. that's yielded us less than 2% growth a year. we all know if we took the number of americans that have left the work force and recalculated unemployment rate, it wouldn't be 7.8%, it would be about 10.5%. the path that my friends on the other side recommend doesn't work. and the balance in both the r.s.c. budget and ryan budget are much more promising course. they achieve that balance by not raising taxes, while not raising taxes. i think that's very important, too. we certainly aren't undertaxed in this country. my friends on the other side clearly believe that we are. they are going to offer multiple tax increases in all their budgets. i like the budget that does not require tax increases. finally, both these budgets, the republican study committee budget and the republican budget, come to gri
the deficit and invest in the middle class, not be used just to simply cut tax rates for the rich the way that the house budget did. so, mr. president, we have a few more hours of debate this morning between now and 11:00, followed by some votes, and then we will close out debate and move on to all the rest of the votes that we will take before final passage sometime late tonight or early tomorrow morning. i ask the senate -- as the senate majority leader said, we have hundreds of amendments filed. if we were to vote on every one of them, we would be here voting every single hour all the way through monday or tuesday. i know most members know that's not going to happen. so i would really encourage every member of the senate to work with the manager on their side to let us know which amendments are your priority so we can get them up sooner rather than later and vote on the ones that you want us to. so i urge all of our colleagues to work with us and our staffs and with ranking member sessions and his staff to make sure we know what your priorities are, how you would like to proceed, and w
a jobs deficit. we have a budget deficit. and these are the byproducts of a leadership deficit. we still have no budget from the president, in violation of the law. he gets his ncaa bracket in on time but still no budget. this is the fourth time in five years. he set a new record this year, two months with no plan, while we had trillion-dollar deficits and a debt crisis on the horizon. his party leaders, unfortunately, failing offering a serious account of our challenge. no serious plan to grow our economy or create jobs. no plan to ever balance the budget. take more. trillions of dollars more to spend more in washington. that's what got us in this mess in the first place. so what can be done? the good news is that we now have a vehicle for regular order. the democrats derailed the budget process each of the last few years and stopped governing when they stopped budgeting. at least we now have a budget process that's moving. we brought them back in the game this spring. that's a good thing. so what's going to happen in the weeks ahead? well, we will make the case for our priorities. whet
reduce unemployment to nearly five -- two near 5% and three years. it would reduce the deficit by $4.4 trillion over 10 years. and it would strengthen medicare and medicaid amah and you'd be asking the wealthy to pay their fair share. -- medicare and medicaid and you would be asking the wealthy to pay their fair share. guest: the institute of policy analysis estimated that you are spending money on infrastructure. we have a to point to dollar trillion infrastructure deficit, according to the transportation -- american society of civil engineers. building roads, highways, bridges, etc. you put people to work building schools and other necessary things. you give money to the states. the states have laid off 700,000 cops, firefighters, and teachers. you give money to states for couple years to rehire them. those kinds of things add up. by doing all this, you stimulate the economy. that means the private sector generates more jobs. it comes to about 7 million altogether. host: what do you consider fair share when it comes to wealthy taxpayers? guest: we propose two different things. numb
and then on the deficit this year, the democrat deficit would be 164 billion dollars bigger than the republican deficit. and next year, 308 billion dollars, just to give you a sense of it, by 2015 the republican deficit would be down to 125 billion and the democrat deficit 433 billion. there's a big indication of the difference between the parties when you look at the budgets of the budget blueprints of the republicans in the house and the democrats in senate and republicans want to restrain spending and democrats want to continue to blow up the budget and eventually, over the decade add 1 trillion dollars of new taxes. >> sean: yeah, so 1 trillionew a trillion dollars, this is like they know no other way, all right? that's point one, but yet, they still will give us almost trillion dollar deficits as far as the eye can see throughout the entire ten-year period. here is the big issue though, i want to see obamacare repealed, but it's not going to happen through paul ryan's budget plan. the republicans, if they want that to happen, to get ryan's plan through, they're going to have to during one of the c
% in three years and the deficit by force of $4 trillion and strengthen medicare and medicaid and you'd be asking the wealthy to pay their fair share. how do you get 7 million new jobs in one year in your budget? money onu are spending infrastructure. we have a $2.20 trillion in infrastructure deficit according to the american society of civil engineers three allows people to work on roads, bridges, etc.. you put people to work building schools and other necessary things. you give money to the states. states have laid off 700,000 cops and firefighters and teachers. by doing all this, you stimulate the economy by putting aggregate demand. what do you consider fair share when it comes to wealthy taxpayers? >> we propose to different things. we propose to close tax loopholes. - indid the our budget close many we will of the corporate tax loopholes. he sablan the profits home by taxing it at 3% -- you say bring them profits home by testing it at 3%. we say no. money here and through accounting tricks make it appear as if it is in the cayman islands. we will tax it all. but he should get a
of the simpson-bowles plan. the plan reduced the deficit through the balance approach that clued additional targets cuts and also revenue from closing a lot of the special interest tax breaks for very wealthy people, tax breaks which mitt romney and paul ryan talked been on the campaign trail. >> neil: they were without raising the overall rate. now we have the rates raised. so republicans talk of a need for a trigger. they might go along with this tax break stuff and all their closing the loopholes, that they did agree it's sort of wasting time and money and the tax code, but you guys have then got to, as part of the trigger, agree simultaneously to these cuts you talked about. what do you make of that? >> well, first of all, the difference is republicans have never said they're willing to close some of those tax loopholes for the purpose of reducing the deficit. which is what the bipartisan -- >> neil: i got a couple on you. i suspect no angel in the ranks of either party. but they did say that they would be open to closing these loopholes but without this being the only negotiating point
policy center, the ryan budget would have managed to actually add $5.7 trillion to the deficit . a close look at the math makes it clear that the ryan budget can't recoup the revenue lost from its tax cuts without imposing large tax increases on the middle class families. the tax policy center was unwilling to speculate on where the lost revenue would come from. in addition to the economic policy institute estimates that e ryan budget would kill 750,000 jobs this year, two million next year and increased gross domestic product by 1.7 percentage points. the priorities of this budget are all wrong. it kills jobs, stifles growth and adds to the deficit. all while making life harder for seniors, women, children and the most vulnerable in our society. the math of the budget just does not add up. simple arithmetic tells you that the only way to pay for mr. ryan's proposed tax cuts for the fortunate few is to eliminate many of the deductions that middle class families count on to pay for housing and health care and to save for their retirement. the ryan tax plan would further burden those who a
what that means. neil: i think it's a deficit. >> no, it's 17 times our debt. pretty close there. neil: i was talking to charlie rangel earlier on this issue, and he more or less tried to make fun of the notion of imujts themselves, whether they are on time or late, regardless, you know, no one really sticks to them, and actually in truth, he's right about that, but he duds make a mockery of the process, not only when you propose budgets late, and other presidents who have done this before. he's developed into an art form, obviously, but when you don't stick to them in the thing, and you blow them away by spending far more than is allocated in them. what do you think of this in >> well, i think submitting a budget's important besides the fact it's required by law because it's the blueprint for where we go forward fiscally, and you have to abide by the law. what congress is doing between the ryan budget and murray budget, we're going nowhere fast, and essentially, the question is is president obama going to put forth a budget, stick his neck out, modernize entitlements? guess what, if n
budget plan reduces the deficit without raising taxes. >> the republican plan is the same baby with a new diaper. >> we know tt until recentl president obama and israeli prime minister netanyahu enjoyed what can be politely described as a somewhat strained relationship. on april 7 of last year, the "new york times" reported benjamin netanyahu and mitt romney enjoyed a warm relationship. almost one year later, the israelis have given obama a medal. they appear to be on the same page on iran. >> diplomacy and sanctions have not stopped iran's nuclear programs. diplomacy and sanctions must be augmented by a clear and credible threat of military action. >> we will do what is necessary to prevent iran from getting the world's worst weapons. >> will this story have a happy ending? >> this story will not have a happy ending. what we saw this week was barack obama at his best, connecting with an audience, and he made a compelling case for the need for a two-state solution, the security of israel and the well- being of the region. >> charles? >> the emphasis has been on personality. what happened
taxes. i thought the increased taxes would maybe go to taking care of some of the deficit. no. it's simply going to continually expanding the size and scope of dot government, and those taxes are on families, just like obamacare is placing taxes on family. you do not hear the republican leadership saying we're the defenders of the american family, of businesses. we want to unleash this economy so that it will absolutely grow. by the way, about that easter egg hunt. why, if they're going to haste do they even put it on the tickets they were threatening to stall the whole thing? that would be the first time in the history of the easter egg roll that it would have been cancelled for politics. the only other time it's been cancelled, it's for war. it's a stunning thing but all too justify this administration's temper tantrum over wanting to have a complete free rein to spend as much as they want. >> neil: eggs actually. they don't know. i'm done. i'm done. thank you very much. this will be our lead issue tonight. why this guy who did this dance is really wigging out right now. david w
? and also the idea that the federal government can't have a deficit, it's crazy. the republicans have somehow adopted this and sold the american people that the most important thing facing this congress and country is to balance the federal budget. no, it's not. how about creating jobs? how about repairing our infrastructure? repairing our bridges and our highways and sewage treatment plans and all of that? how about investing in new energy projects and new medical advances and a cure for cancer? that's a hell of a lot more important than balancing the freakin' budget. that's the first thing wrong with this ryan budget. the second thing is that the ryan budget destroys medicare. still does. we talked about it this is the same damn budget that they passed two years ago, that they passed last year. it would shut down medicare for anybody who is not already in it, cut benefits for those who are, but shut down medicare for anybody who is not in it and replace it with a voucher. a voucher that would not even come close to buying you health care from a private insuran
that the obama care would be deficit-neutral and control costs i think has turned out to be a charade. if you look at the longer term projections it looks especially more unlikely today than it did when they were engaged in the budget that allowed it to pass. what i think is interesting on the political side is how republicans are treating the issue right now. there is a debate inside the republican party whether it's wise to continue talking about obamacare. on one hand you have a group that says in effect this is over, this is done, we should tweak it, try to improve it, do what we can. let's not focus op it because it's in the past and discussion of aweer thety. on the other hand people think talk about it all the time because implementation is proving difficult and it will be more difficult as we go along to the republicans' benefit. >> bret: the second group of republicans believe the thing could crater. it could just not work. >> correct. that is a possibility. i think that the comment we just heard, there are thousands of pages of regulation that people haven't read is true. i don't ca
if you don't tax device makers? it comes from the taxes. this is going to be added on the deficit. they constructed a budget, that made it look as if, as obama promised, not going to cost the treasury a dime. well, the cbo says it will cost $1.3 trillion over a decade. so there is an increase in $1.3 trillion plus a dime in taxes. so that it ends up looking like it's not going to cost. but there will be increases in taxes everywhere. this one will be canceled. it's ridiculous. this is the one area, medical devices where the u.s. has tremendous advantage in technology over the rest of the world. why would you kill an industry that is so productive? so, the money will be cut. it will have to come out of taxes. the $1.3 trillion will become $1.6 trillion. it will climb. ultimately it will be a drag on the economy. i think ultimately after it hits and you get a train wreck and all the inefficiencies people will say in a couple of years, why don't we adopt a canadian system? cut out the middleman. and stop all the waste. simply have a simple system. government is completely in control
and the government would still be in a deficit ten years from now. senator patty murray, however, argues it creates jobs and economic growth for the democrats, the vote is a big accomplishment. >> first of all, over the last two decades the average budget resolution considered 78 amendments. we've done 101. average, we've done 70, twice as many. to doing this has been a herculean feat. >> hundreds of amendments were filed, but 70 were voted on. senators approved a sales tax for online retail sales and voted to approve tkeystone pipeline and to big to fail for big banks. and these are mostly symbolic gestures and show where the senators stand on issues and of course, when you take a 13 hour 6 minute vote there does have to be a little bit of humor. >> it is good to say that as of this time, 5 a.m., there has not been a day without a budget being passed in the united states senate. (laughter) . >> reporter: all democrats voted yea with exception four who are up for reelection in 2014 and states which can be unfriendly to democrats and white house secretary responding to today's news and saying the p
choose. keep the current cuts in place, or get the same amount of deficit reduction by eliminating or reducing provisions in the tax code that benefits specific corporations or wealth year taxpayers. you choose. >> bill: we will give you more choices to make when we come back here with congresswoman jan schakowsky. you choose. >> this is "the bill press show." [ music ] guys that do reverse mortgage commercials? those types are now. (vo) she gets the comedians laughing and the thinkers thinking. >>ok, so there's wiggle room in the ten commandments, that's what you're saying. you would rather deal with ahmadinejad than me. >>absolutely. >> and so would mitt romney. (vo) she's joy behar. >>and the best part is that current will let me say anything. what the hell were they thinking? >> chatting with you life on current.com/billpress. this is "the bill press show" live on your radio and current tv. >> >> bill: how about it 43 minutes after the hour? we are coming to you live from our nation's capitol, brought to you today by the national education associatio
saying we want a lot more spending, most of it paid for by deficit this year and next. we'll see a lot of defectses from the democrat budget resolution. we saw a vote yesterday in the senate which was, you talked with stuart varney about. repealing the medical device tax. we're likely to see a lot of defects from the white house and the democratic leadership proposal to have a lot more spending in year and coming years. we saw the opening mark of that yesterday. bill: peter cottontail still on the schedule for the 1st of april. we'll bring you back and we'll continue this little discussion about what's right and what's not given the budget crunch. >> bring back the white house tours. bring back the white house tours. bring back the white house tours. there we go. bill: enjoy austin. see you soon. heather. heather: the clock is ticking as the country is on a verge of collapse. can a deal be reached before there is a i had on people's bank accounts and is this something we could see happen to your bank account? bill: also a scared homeowner, well, you won't believe what they did when a h
without a hint of how it would be possible. without exploding the deficit or dramatically raising taxes on the middle class. this is consistent with what the romney ryan ticket said on the campaign trail last fall. the same issue where they dodged, assembled, and ignored the perfectly reasonable question how is it possible? six months later it's back in the budget but there's still -- but there still is no answer. during the last 40 years there have been only four budgets without deficits. the last three clinton budgets and the one that george bush inherited from bill clinton. in each case taxes as a percentage of the total economy were over 20%. in this republican fantasy land budgets are balanced with revenues at 19% of the economy, yet meeting the needs of 78 million more seniors and a infrastructure deficit that is growing as america is falling apart. clearly this is not remotely possible if we are going to enjoy anything like our current quality of life. there is a real world intersection of budget saving opportunities with potential areas of agreement. health care reform is one. b
gone through a state where wisconsin had faced a multibillion $budget deficit. we saw some of the record jobs will we've seen in the past. what did we do? we took that $3.6 billion and -- half a billion surplus. we lowered the overall taxes for the first time in years. taxes on homes have gone down in each of the last two years. [applause] but when it comes to jobs under my predecessors terms wisconsin lost 300,000 jobs and just 10% of our employers were headed in the right direction. today we're gaining jobs and 93% of the employers says that wisconsin is heading in the right direction. we can leave with an optimistic message. simply put in we showed in our election who do you want in charge, the big government or do you want the hard working taxpayers, the hard working taxpayers win out and they will win out over and over again. in america, we need to show an optimistic message that we're not standing with the big businesses of america, we're standing with the hard-working taxpayers and this is the message that can resonate throughout this country. [applause] now, in addi
calling about the obamacare and also about the deficit in the united states. my feeling is, many workers across america have lost their insurance and have lower wages because of company downsizing and lower profits. we still pay government workers high wages and give them excellent paid insurance. maybe it is time to decrease their wages and to make their -- make them have a payment they have to pay for their insurance -- [indiscernible] guest: interesting point you bring up about people losing their health insurance. in a bipartisan move in this budget, there is a directive to couch the effect of the number of people losing their health insurance because of obamacare. it was a republican sponsored saying -- thing. they will try to see how much it is occurring. host: the house approved the continuing resolution by 310- 109. 27 republicans and 82 republicans voted no. theye senate version, passed -- 20 republicans voted yes. the democrat of montana voted no. now that these two measures have been passed by the separate chambers, what happens next? guest: the cr goes to the president. sign
trillion deficits -- that would be the annual difference between what we bring in and what the government spends -- four in a row more than a trillion dollars -- after more than $1.6 trillion in tax increases, after hundreds of billions of dollars worth of new regulations, our country is mired, we are mired in the longest period of high unemployment since the great depression. that is a direct consequence of this huge debt and our creditors' lack of confidence that we're actually serious about dealing with it. indeed, many workers have simply given up on finding work, which is one reason why our labor force participation rate is now at a 32-year low. unemployment's almost 8% but that doesn't take into account the millions of people who have simply given up looking for work after a long period of unemployment. since june 2009, when the recession officially ended, median household income has fallen by more than $2,400. so instead of treading water, the average american family is seeing their buying power decrease by more than $ 2,400 since 2009. at the same time, they're finding not only ar
to a trillion dollars in new deficit for this year. you know, you look at paul ryan's budget, for example, ten years down the road, 41 1/2 trillion dollars in spending and that was supposed to be a victory, because the democrat's version was 46 1/2 trillion dollars, we're still outspending our means. still a broken system. d.c. really has to figure out how to get a balance, a balanced budget would be a win. stuart: in the short-term if i'm a trader, trading stocks, for example, i think this is a win for republicans and i think this is a win for me as an investor. stocks go uu. you say? >> well, i think you're conflating. and 20 years trading and what i told you last time and the last time and last time, i think that things are getting better in spite of president obama because if we continue to juice the system the way we are, we're adding 85 billion dolllrs to the treasury, ingratiating the banking system. i'll tell you this, ready for this? you have investors out there to watch the show and pick out stocks to buy, just buy u.s. banks. buy u.s. banks. we are giving them so much money. we're g
-point deficit to beat the cleveland cavaliers 98-95. they have now won 24 games in a row. >> bill: can you imagine being down 27. >> i mean that's -- in the third quarter being down that much is daunting. but it shows just how dominant lebron james is, when he is ready to turn it on, he turns it on, and there is no stopping him. which is different than he used to be. now he is a monster. >> bill: you have got it. we have a great lineup for you for the rest of the program, congress woman judy chu from southern california will be joining us as well as a friend of bill from the "huffington post" and joe, our own foreign policy guru who will bring us up to date on what the president is up to in the middle east and his syria in fact use chemical weapons as has been reported. and the republican party engaged in a sort of a civil war. we'll get into that, but first -- >> announcer: this is the "full court press." >> espn releasing president obama's complete march madness yesterday as the men's tournament gets underway today. number one louisville, indiana, ohio state, an
of the well. mrs. shaheen: amendment 438 would establish a deficit neutral reserve fund fupped to protect women's access to health care, including family planning and birth control. it ensures employers cannot deny coverage of contraceptives. we've seen that improving access to preventive care including con troo tra ception is good health -- contraception is good health policy and good economic policy. healthier women and healthier children and healthier families. i urge my colleagues to support the amendment. the presiding officer: the senator is recognized. a senator: every senator supports expanding access to health care. we may have differences on how to it but no one should doubt that commitment. however, we must also ensure we protect deeply held religious beliefs of our citizens. in this regard, the shaheen amendment and the new health care law gets it all wrong. mr. johanns: in addition to growing government and slowing the economy, the law tramples on the rights of individuals. later this afternoon senator fischer will offer a side-by-side to this amendment. now i ask my colleagu
Search Results 0 to 31 of about 32 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)